Welcome to the Piano World Piano ForumsOver 2 million posts about pianos, digital pianos, and all types of keyboard instruments
Join the World's Largest Community of Piano Lovers
(it's free)
It's Fun to Play the Piano ... Please Pass It On!

Emmery, OTOH, there is clear evidence that during the last 3000 years that the Pythogorean scale has been tweaked and adjusted to approximate the most pleasing sound. The evidence of this are the large number of alternatives there are (with new ones such as EBVT III coming out all the time). Other instruments with centuries old issues have also attempted at improving harmony (and intonation).

Other instruments have also been experimenting in these regards. On guitar a novel technique has been created and has been very popular with professionals: http://www.buzzfeiten.com/.

I think very few tuners actually tune to equal temperament. That might be their goal, but in reality when they set the temperament, many are not right on equal temperament but rather some variation that sounds good to them.

Unless a tuner uses an electronic tuner and sets each note to equal temperament then I'll stick my neck out and say that ALL aural tuners do NOT tune in equal temperament.

Well, it's a pity that Bill already knows the answers, but perhaps a few more of the EBVT-III proponents (or enthusiasts) can chime in? For my part, I'm off this weekend to a brass band festival of our church. I'll pop back into this thread next week.

I love experimental and alternative things and welcome them with open hands, but I do understand the reasons why some things persevere and respect that also as do most people. A piano begins to slip out of tune the moment the tuner pulls his hammer off the last pin. Sometimes its quite a while before they get tuned again. One reason that tuners pick ET to tune in is that it is a theoretical perfection, a bullseye to aim for but one we always miss by a bit because of the nature of how piano strings do not produce perfect partials.

Everybody knows that to get near a bullseye in shooting...you have to aim at it. How can a temperament that deviates from true ET in the initial process of "aiming" be expected to sound as decent as one that doesn't, especially once things begin to slip out of their original settings? I doubt it does. If there are certain intervals that require more precise alignment because they border on unacceptability, these same intervals will sound much worse as the tuning fades than ones that have an adequate buffer zone which ET by nature provides equally. As for beauty, its in the eye of the beholder; its not uncommon for brazen artists to think their own creations are the most beautiful and to try and convince others to think likewise.

Jeez, Bill, I'm glad you're alright... and very good to hear that the damages are of material nature!

Originally Posted By: Mark R.

Well, it's a pity that Bill already knows the answers, but perhaps a few more of the EBVT-III proponents (or enthusiasts) can chime in?

Mark, as I said earlier I'd be happy to participate, but I feel I have an unfair advantage, too, as I believe I get too much help from my sound engineer background.

Anyways, I PM:ed my 'guesses' to GP, so we'll see how my analytic skills hold up

Here's an excerpt from my PM to GP:

Originally Posted By: pppat

[...]Personally, if I'd go into interval-listening mode, it would drive me nuts. What I listen for in the sound files is energy in the harmonic progressions. Listening through the recordings in a non-sound tech mode (as far as that might be possible) seems to confirm that EBVTIII moves where ET stands still, so to speak.

Time to nail the coffin? I'd be happy to be wrong, cause that would make me question a lot of things, and that is always a healthy thing to do.[...]

To me, there are harmonic give-aways in each of the sound clips. The one that stands out most (to my ears) is the cadenza right in the beginning of Il Postino.

There are similar ones in 'Everything happens to me' and 'Out of Africa', too. I encourage everybody to listen for harmonic movement, it might be a rewarding experience! When I play written music, this difference in the temperaments is the main reason that my interpretations come out differently.

Actually Emmery. ET is not theoretical perfection at all! It is a "temperament" just like any other temperament. In fact, it is expected to have a certain amount of dissonance. While ET is pretty close at its best for fifths and fourths, not even in theory are the intervals perfect. For instance, comparing the ratio of fifths (to just intonation JI):

And compared to JI for a minor seventh ET is 31 cents off of perfection (that's 1/3 of a note interval, yikes!!). I guess this is just my opinion, but ET is nowhere near perfection. Of course, ET has many desirable qualities such as having the same color/moods of tone transposed to any key. EBVT III probably introduces some very subtle distinctions from key to key (which I am ok with).

Also, excellent vocalists, string players, etc never play in ET. I remember listening to Bonnie Raitt on Richard Thompson's song Dimming of the Day (excellent rendition BTW). There is one note that she hits in the song which bridges from one chord to another. The first time I heard it I remember thinking what an awesome vocalist she is. You can distinctly hear her pitch rise from chord to chord (maybe 5-10 cents) as she brings her voice into consonance with the second chord. Stellar. I wish I could remember exactly the line in that tune.

Curious....how many tuners in the states...dont come on PW...so really have not expressed any opinions on temperment tuning....so far....about 20 different people have been involved, in this thread. I gather many are players...I am guessing there is hardly a conclusion to be drawn about how any tuning style compares to another. I would not call it a fad...but certainly not a trend

_________________________
Richard, the"Piano Guy"Piano Moving Tuning & Repair From London ON to Fort Erie ON

No one knows how many tuners are really here. The number of views for this thread is very high, and perhaps there are a lot of tuners here who are listening but not commenting on EBVT III, and not participating in the temperament test.

Probably correct....I just meant its probably too early to put a label on a new thing. I like it....and with most of Bills articles from his web page, great stuff. Always good to learn new tricks...especially an old dog like me....

_________________________
Richard, the"Piano Guy"Piano Moving Tuning & Repair From London ON to Fort Erie ON

... I make the choices I do because they result in a better sounding, more musically pleasing piano than any version of ET ever could. The number of people who have come to understand this to be true is growing and gaining momentum. I predict the the end result will be that ET will end up having been a fad that lasted about 100 years.

The rest of the 10's of thousands or piano tuners out there continue doing what they are doing because it is the accepted norm for almost a hundred years now. A "fad" is something that gains popularity for a brief, short time, by definition.

Even if all your clients were happy and could even tell the difference, the sum of you all represents less than a 1000th of a percent of all the pianos out there being regularly tuned differently. Smoke, mirrors, puffery and all the self praise in the world you can muster will hardly challenge or persevere against what is accepted by most everyone else out there (accepted for their own valid reasons). There have been countless others before you who have also made the same claims and faded into obscurity...not one has gained a foothold in the mainstream of music. As the famous saying goes...your a long, long way from Kansas, Dorthy.

Except that most of what is believed to be ET is really reverse well. Yep, tens of thousands of piano tuners keep cranking it out every day.

I noticed that you didn't try to identify which was which and I know the reason. You aren't really sure. You are sure of of a few things, I know that: You only believe in ET. It is the "modern" way to tune. You wouldn't recognize reverse well if you heard it, so therefore, it doesn't happen, I just made it up. You are sure about not joining PTG and taking the exams too, very sure. You already took exams that proved you knew more than the PTG exams cover. You are sure you would never send any of your money to the USA.

But you aren't sure which of these recordings are ET and which are the EBVT III and that undermines everything you have ever thought you knew for sure about piano tuning. You said in one post that you would not discuss anything with me anymore, yet you still try to provoke arguments. If you don't want to comment, don't comment. If you don't like the EBVT III, then why did you even read what was posted here?

Well, it's a pity that Bill already knows the answers, but perhaps a few more of the EBVT-III proponents (or enthusiasts) can chime in? For my part, I'm off this weekend to a brass band festival of our church. I'll pop back into this thread next week.

Peace to all.

Mark R., count me as a proponent and enthusiast!

I'm embarassed to say that I'm 1 for 3! I got the first one right, and missed the next two. Once I learned the answers, I went back to see what fooled me, and to understand my mistakes. I see now where I missed it.

Nevertheless, I know what's on my piano, EBVT III, and I love it! I know what I heard in a live jazz performance, it was EBVT III, and the pianist loved it, and so did I! I know what I've been listening to in GP's, Patrick's, Nick's, Glen's, Ryan's, and Bill's recordings, EBVT III, and I love it!

I'm not a tuner, but I am an avid listener. There is a difference in the temperaments. To me, it is a pleasing difference. I don't believe I got one right by chance. I do believe I got two wrong because I mis-interpreted what I was hearing.

I noticed that you didn't try to identify which was which and I know the reason. You aren't really sure. You are sure of of a few things, I know that: You only believe in ET. It is the "modern" way to tune. You wouldn't recognize reverse well if you heard it, so therefore, it doesn't happen, I just made it up. You are sure about not joining PTG and taking the exams too, very sure. You already took exams that proved you knew more than the PTG exams cover. You are sure you would never send any of your money to the USA.

But you aren't sure which of these recordings are ET and which are the EBVT III and that undermines everything you have ever thought you knew for sure about piano tuning. You said in one post that you would not discuss anything with me anymore, yet you still try to provoke arguments. If you don't want to comment, don't comment. If you don't like the EBVT III, then why did you even read what was posted here?

Bill,

isn´t EBVT III more recent than ET? So why do you say ET is the modern way?Et was introduced to overcome limitations of unequal temperaments, that happened already 300 years ago. EBVT III is not older than how many years? And you want to tell us that the composers who died 200 years ago just wanted to express their music with only and just the sound EBVT III does produce? For me there are too much contradictions in this argumentations.

Even in Bach´s well tempered clavier there are pieces with different mood in all keys, including outer keys, not only sad mood for outer keys and happy mood for diatonic keys. A clear evidence for me that Bach composed for ET and nothing else (he had knowledge about ET from Werckmeister).

Yet another contradiction is to claim clarity for EBVTIII while at the same time "warbling" of the tone is very prominent in many keys.

We often hear the argument here that EBVT III may be more "musical" while other approaches are more theoretical. I can´t disagree more with this statement, as it implies a discriminational character. When speaking about musicality we should bear in mind, that this term has not the same meaning for everyone and should therefore not be claimed as to be true by the proponents of one or another approach.

My concerns about the comparative recordings where not about the technical recording setups, but that the recordings where all not on a professional level by tuning quality. There is a clear indication for me here that for the proponents of EBVT III the tuning quality doesn´t really matter, as there is general raving about the recordings, at the same time often accompanied by comments that regions of the tuning were unstable.

For me (and probably most professional tuners), tuning quality does matter and is essential to improve dynamic and color palette (i avoid the statement to achieve more musicality...).

Again i see no sense in competing about this or that method. It is all a matter of taste and there will be always people who prefer one or the other ways. It even doesn´t have evidence if proponents for one or another way are in majority or minority. As said already, some people like the "warbling" tone of belcanto singing, but many doesn´t, one reason for me why opera or classical string orchestra music is not so popular as it could be perhaps today. I adore for example Roger Norrington´s romantic orchestra repertoire, where he forbids the warbling of the tone.

Isn't it interesting that this EBVT III thread has garnered so many views since I started it on March 3, 2010. 37,180 views as of today. Are they coming here to read about and listen to "out of tune" pianos tuned by "hacks" and "amateurs" and hear pianos that have "unstable" areas, and listen to and read about a temperament that is not musical? I don't think so.

Yes, I may not be a professional tuner, and my tunings are not perfect, unisons etc, but I can certainly say that they are pretty good for an amateur, and certainly good enough to show the differences between temperaments. You were even complimentary Bernard...I quote from an email you sent me regarding my ETD comparison posting ",,,,Congratulations, the piano sounds very nice, great work."

Yes, opinions vary, thank heavens, as the world would be very boring if they did not. That old saying, "Variety is the spice of Life" How appropriate for this thread on EBVT III.

I am sure we will soon be hearing some examples from several "professional" tuners, stay tuned.

isn´t EBVT III more recent than ET? So why do you say ET is the modern way?

Bernhard, you have to read the context. The word modern is even in quotation marks, to make sure the message gets through.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

Et was introduced to overcome limitations of unequal temperaments, that happened already 300 years ago. EBVT III is not older than how many years? And you want to tell us that the composers who died 200 years ago just wanted to express their music with only and just the sound EBVT III does produce? For me there are too much contradictions in this argumentations.

I've never heard Bill say anything along those lines. What he says is that 'composers who died 200 years ago' probably might have been composing using an unequal temperament. Besides, there are numerous references that state that ET was not looked keenly on when it was introduced. I think that might be a natural reaction. Bleaching the color spectra into grayscale, must have felt strange.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

Even in Bach´s well tempered clavier there are pieces with different mood in all keys, including outer keys, not only sad mood for outer keys and happy mood for diatonic keys. A clear evidence for me that Bach composed for ET and nothing else (he had knowledge about ET from Werckmeister).

What a simplification! - did anybody say that close keys are happy and remote keys are sad? I don't think so.

Bill speaks about the different characteristics of the keys, and clearly states that the choice was up to the composer. As an example, Beethoven might have wanted to create tension in the root cadenzas by scoring in Ab major, whereas someone like Mendelssohn might have modulated to Ab major as a a temporary effect,'spicing' up the harmony.

Oh, and by the way, all 12 major keys and their relative minors are equally diatonic.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

Yet another contradiction is to claim clarity for EBVTIII while at the same time "warbling" of the tone is very prominent in many keys.

Haven't heard this one either. EBVT III brings color to the keys. Harmonic motion, not clarity.

Yes, but a stretched ruler is only stretching the reading scale - there would be no shuffling of the subdivisions. ET XL will still be ET in my book.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

We often hear the argument here that EBVT III may be more "musical" while other approaches are more theoretical. I can´t disagree more with this statement, as it implies a discriminational character.

Haven't heard this one, either. (Still, something might have been said in the heat of the moment, but if that's the case, please give me some reference to those postings here.)What I've heard (and said myself) is that EBVT III sounds very musical. I've even stated several times that I experience ET as grayscale and EBVT as colors, but that is not about the musical validation of either one.

Originally Posted By: Bernhard Stopper

My concerns about the comparative recordings where not about the technical recording setups, but that the recordings where all not on a professional level by tuning quality.

Well, this is not how I instinctively interpreted your earlier post about the recording quality. So the sound files are suddenly ok, now it's the tunings themselves? Bear with me, just trying to follow you here.

If you hear possible tuning deviations in GP:s great recordings (jeez, his tunings are getter better blazingly fast ), your ears are without doubt developed to an extent where it should be easy for you to know from which temperament the tunings are deviating.

Same thing with your earlier post about the non-professional quality of GP:s recordings (yeah, I know you withdrew/rephrased that statement, but I think your earlier post leaves no doubt as to what you imply).

GP:s recordings are what close mics sound like in any average professional recording studio I've worked in through the years.

They are, however, 'readable' to a sound engineer, which should give you and edge in the blindfold. The test should be no problem whatsoever to you. I would like to challenge you to go ahead and take the quiz! You are without any doubt a skilled piano tuner, so your answers would be most valuable to this thread.

As promised here is another recording of my piano in EBVT III. This really isn't a piece per se, but 2 motifs that I've played for years (the "prettier" one of which I wrote when I was 13!) sort of assembled into a piece. For lack of a better name I'm just calling this Discovery.

Bill, I didn't make a comment about which one was which because of two factors. One is that there can be a lot of smoke and mirrors involved in the recordings; move a mike this way or that way, sample rates, editing, tweaking, ect. I could take any first year recording engineer and have him make a stellar tuning in any temperament pale in comparison to an lesser quality one with a bit of software and knowhow (in the context of recorded music).

Secondly, my interests in this thread have more to do with the descriptions that are used to differentiate the two. Like somebody once mentioned on another thread, its like differentiating the taste of brown mustard from yellow; so far, all I read here is that it tastes browner. My wife and I were eating pie and cookies the other day and we each disagreed about which one was sweeter....really, where do you go from there?

I can accept that some people find the EBVT better for their own reasons, but would you be happy that they do so because its a fad gaining momentum, or because there is something actually of merit that makes it so? With Greshams Law applied, you probably don't even realize that EBVT or any other temperament on the fringes of practicality have never had it so good. We live in a world where Andy Warhol could get almost 12 million $ for a screened image of a soup can and top art critics find a computer enhanced image of Mona Lisa (her bust was increased slightly in size) more pleasing than the original. Pardon me saying, but I do look into the reasoning behind peoples tastes with some skepticism in this day and age.

Bill, I tune the way I do because its something myself and my customers are familiar with. Not because of ignorance as you seem to think, nor because I choose not to be fellow member of the club.

Familiarity brings a comfort zone to most pianists. They perform the best when the piano is familiar to them in feel, touch, tone and tune. Its true that some like to experiment on any of these things, but from the ones I meet, most don't. So I give them what they want, and they pay me.

My refusal to discuss things with you pertains only to posts where you resort to name calling or PT(Gooning)me. That simply follows the forum etiquette expected of us here.

First of all, Ryan, thanks for your post. Wow, that sounds fantastic!! Bravo for your tuning ability, and your composing as well! I love new age music. It has a beautifuly rich and colorful harmonious sound to it in EBVT III, and anyone that says differently, has another agenda. I could listen to that all day, and never tire of it! Just beautiful.

From my perspective Emmery, there are no smoke and mirrors here, and I never intended there to be any. There was NO manipulation done to these recordings in order to make EBVT III sound better than ET or vice-versa. I am not a professional recording engineer. I do not know the 'tricks of the trade' to manipulate and add this and that to the recordings. These recordings were not done in a professional studio, but in my living room under every day normal conditions. The only processing done to these recordings was a normalization of the volume, in order to make both examples the same volume, that is it. The fact that they sound as good as they do is quite impressive, and is due to the digital recorder, the mics, the piano, my tuning ability, and the temperament. If they were done in a professional studio, then I could understand your being concerned about the manipulation of the recording to make one sound better than the other.

Yes, different mics in different positions produce different sounds, but in this case, they do not and cannot change the temperament to warrant their dismissal in this thread.

Emmery, please feel free to record some of your work and post it in here, just as Ryan did above, or start another thread. I would like to hear it. I am serious, and I am not being facetious when I say that. In fact, everyone is invited to post their work here, or in a new thread...why not have more of this type of discussion...it opens peoples minds to a different way of tuning. Indeed, why not?

Soon, we will have another excellent example of EBVT III and ET to listen to. Stay tuned!

Bill, I didn't make a comment about which one was which because of two factors.

No, we all know that is a lie. There was only one factor. You could not be sure of which was which and that disturbs you greatly. You think the EBVT III ought to sound bad, no matter what music is played on it. Only ET would sound right to you. But now you find out something you did not expect so you are scrambling to save face. Forget it, you have already lost.

I suggest you stick to what you have already told me: you won't discuss anything with me, you won't join PTG and take the exams and you won't spend any of your Canadian money in the USA.

Look for other threads where you can contribute effectively. You have already made your opinion about unequal temperaments very well known. You have chosen to attack and ridicule any such notion. You have clearly stated that you only want to tune and only believe in the way you already tune as the only acceptable way to tune. So, for you, there are no ifs, ands or buts, you have already said all that you can say.

What more could you say on this topic that you have not already said? You only believe in ET. You would not dare to try anything but ET for a performing artist and the same extends down to your lowliest customer. You have already made your decision and determination. By spending even one second reading anything in this thread, you are wasting your time.

By spending even one second to try to tell everyone that the EBVT III is the wrong way to tune, that only ET is right, you are wasting your time and energy. We already know what you think about this topic. I, for one, don't care what you think, don't want to read what you think because whatever you say, it will never change in the slightest way what I think and what I do.

I have already made up my mind and have made my decisions just as you have. I will continue to tune nearly all of my customer's pianos in the EBVT III. I will NOT tune any piano in ET!!! Go ahead and think whatever you will about that, write whatever you will about that but whatever you do, it will not change my mind or influence what I do in any way, whatsoever.

What I learned about tuning, I learned long ago and put into practice long ago. I also became aware of the most common blunders that tuners make and the most common myths that most tuners believe before you ever learned anything about tuning at all.

As promised here is another recording of my piano in EBVT III. This really isn't a piece per se, but 2 motifs that I've played for years (the "prettier" one of which I wrote when I was 13!) sort of assembled into a piece. For lack of a better name I'm just calling this Discovery.

Copyright 2010 Ryan Fogarty (this music may not be reproduced for commercial purposes... wishful thinking... )

Enjoy!Ryan

Wow! Ryan, I certainly did enjoy your composition. I could really tell what key you were playing in and when. Thank you so much for your contribution! I heard some really amazing sounds that are not heard from a piano tuned in ET. The Key of F just sounds so pure!

"No, we all know that is a lie. There was only one factor. You could not be sure of which was which and that disturbs you greatly. You think the EBVT III ought to sound bad, no matter what music is played on it. Only ET would sound right to you. But now you find out something you did not expect so you are scrambling to save face. Forget it, you have already lost."

Bill, you make a lot of assumptions and then resort to calling me a lier. Nowhere did I say that I even bothered to listen to the recordings. My interests were more to do with the descriptive terminology used by others to describe their opinions about the recordings. Like I said, no assurances can be made that the recordings were not altered that would satisfy a truly unbiased listener. Contrary to what some people may believe, a recording studio is not needed to do so, plenty of cheap software out there and well known techniques that could be used for that purpose. I don't mean to diss the recording, I just abstain from getting involved in something I cannot be sure is on the level.

"I suggest you stick to what you have already told me: you won't discuss anything with me, you won't join PTG and take the exams and you won't spend any of your Canadian money in the USA."

I had dinner in Buffalo NY last night and live within walking distance of your country and both visit and spend money there regularly (especially since your $ has taken a dump as of late). Your assumptions are incorrect again. The exams have flaws according to you, the very foundation of it is in a temperament that have refused to use for many years...whats your point? Besides, I did far more exams with greater depth then the generic minimalist one you suggest.

"Look for other threads where you can contribute effectively. You have already made your opinion about unequal temperaments very well known. You have chosen to attack and ridicule any such notion. You have clearly stated that you only want to tune and only believe in the way you already tune as the only acceptable way to tune. So, for you, there are no ifs, ands or buts, you have already said all that you can say."

I don't ridicule the temperament(s), only your assumptions when they are intended to mock or put down people who do things differently than you. You think that tens of thousands of tuners out there tune in RW. BS To do so, you would have to dismiss the idea that they check for evenly progressing M3's(black & white keys), you would have to assume they don't use an ETD, you would have to assume they didn't pass tests (PTG or others) that are set on the foundations of ET...not RW. I agree with you that some tuners will choose a path that skips important checks that could easily lead to the said RW temperaments, but its a small number than what you claim. Your smoke and mirrors of claiming a bigger problem exists then really does only serves to elevate your one a only solution. Youtube is hardly the place to look for quality recordings or exclusively fine performers.

"I have already made up my mind and have made my decisions just as you have. I will continue to tune nearly all of my customer's pianos in the EBVT III. I will NOT tune any piano in ET!!! Go ahead and think whatever you will about that, write whatever you will about that but whatever you do, it will not change my mind or influence what I do in any way, whatsoever.

What I learned about tuning, I learned long ago and put into practice long ago. I also became aware of the most common blunders that tuners make and the most common myths that most tuners believe before you ever learned anything about tuning at all."

Assumptions again Bill. What seems painfully obvious to me is that you carry a single EBVT III hammer as the only tool you wish to use any more, you say so yourself. It comes as no surprise to me that everything out there by you is viewed as a RW temperament nail.

I can accept that some people find the EBVT better for their own reasons, but would you be happy that they do so because its a fad gaining momentum, or because there is something actually of merit that makes it so? With Greshams Law applied, you probably don't even realize that EBVT or any other temperament on the fringes of practicality have never had it so good. We live in a world where Andy Warhol could get almost 12 million $ for a screened image of a soup can and top art critics find a computer enhanced image of Mona Lisa (her bust was increased slightly in size) more pleasing than the original. Pardon me saying, but I do look into the reasoning behind peoples tastes with some skepticism in this day and age.

[...]

Hi, Emmery.

When I read this post yesterday, I thought about responding, then thought better of it since I am not a professional recording engineer, professional tuner, or professional musician.

But the paragraph above did bother me, especially, because, if anything, I've been a practicing consumer my whole life.

So, you can certainly discount my lack of training as far as hearing perfect unisons and intervals beating in +/- cents and the like. And you can discount my interpretation of what I hear in recordings posted here (that sound pretty hi-fidelity to me through my mid-priced Grados--I mean, I could hear damper felt in Glen's recordings for crineoutloud). And you can discount my opinions of what I hear in the playing of music, though as an amateur pianist, I know a little about what I hear coming from the instrument...

But as a consumer with a heart, I want to reiterate my story, for you in particular, and anyone else who cares to read it.

I always thought my Lester spinet, which I've had for about 15 years, could sound better than it did. It seemed like a solid piano, had a nice touch, and sang with a pretty tone. But tuner after tuner would leave notes behind, which irked me. Last summer, I got really serious about playing again--truly passionate about something of myself that I had neglected for years. So, I found a highly respected tuner, who gave my piano a pristine ET tuning in late August '09. It was truly better than I had ever heard it. So, I asked him what he thought about regulating and voicing it. His opinion was that it would be more than the piano was worth. My opinion was that as soon as I had it tuned three times, I'd invested more than the piano was worth.

After this tuning, I kept a list of problems I was finding with certain keys/hammers/pedals, sqeaks/hisses/etc.. I'd also been reading Braide White, that I picked up at the used book store, to see if there was anything I might be able to do myself to improve my piano.

December rolled around, and I got the bright idea that if I could get my sound into my computer, I could make a little CD for family as a Christmas present. The previous five years, I had been helping somebody edit music and had learned a little about editing wave files using CoolEdit Pro, but had no recording experience. I did have some microphones that belonged to my dad, though, and things were starting to gel in my mind. So I found out how to get sound into my computer using what I had plus $150 for a little input device.

I called the tuner so that I could get another prisine tuning, though I realized that in recording, I would still have to walk over the creaky floor boards of my piano to get anything half-way decent--but it was just going to family, and I figured I could use a little reverb to dress it up.

When the tuner came, I asked him to go over my list with me, told him I was committed to this piano, and wanted him to give me an estimate for regulating and voicing. It was clear he thought I was a fool. "You'll be the first customer that ever asked me to regulate a spinet!" were his exact words. His estimate was on the high side. He gave me a slap-dash tuning, running straight up the keyboard with the ETD, didn't go back to do any fine tuning or even test intervals. I told him I'd consider his estimate and paid for the tuning, though I wasn't happy with it. Like I said, I'm not a professional, but I could tell the difference between the tuning he gave me in August, and the one in December.

So, I made my little Christmas CD, but wasn't happy with the quality of the recording. As I was searching the Internet to learn more about recording, I discovered Piano World. After a coulple of days in Pianist Corner, I noticed the Tuner-Technicians forum, and dove into a thread called "Hysterical Tunings," because I thought it might be funny. It certainly wasn't funny, as you know, but it started me on a path of discovery that has truly opened up possibilities for me.

When I read Bill's posts about EBVT III, I knew enough about temperaments to wonder if this way of tuning would make my Lester sound better. I wrote Bill an e-mail to ask if he knew anyone in my area that tuned as he described. Lo and behold, Bill considered Rockford, IL, which is 90 miles away from Madison, WI, his area, and even had other customers in my neighborhood. We set up a date.

Bill spent a good three and a half or four hours with my piano the first time he tuned it in January. As he was tuning, he kept finding and fixing the things on my list, which I had not shared with him. I would say, "Is that the G?" and he'd say, "Yep." I'd say, "Is that the E?" and he'd say, "Yep." He found them all. Then, as he was tuning, he would reach under the back of the keys and do this lifting, plunking thing, and I asked, "What are you doing?" and he said, "A little regulating." He fixed the squeaky pedal, demonstrated the pipe organ effect, and asked me to play a tune for him. My first impression was the one I came around to after several days of playing tons of different music for hours--that is, that my piano sounded better than it ever had before, especially in the upper bass. I said, "It feels different." Bill said, "That's because I did some regulation."

Now, mind you, I had not told Bill about my bad experience with the tuner before he arrived, although bits of the story came out as he was working. Bill charged me his normal tuning fee for all that work, when the other tuner was going to charge me 10 times that to make a big hairy deal out of what Bill did in an afternoon. I added what I could to Bill's pay because I was so grateful for all of his work. After writing this, I wish I had added more!

It took me a couple of days of playing to get familiar with the new temperament. I liked what I was hearing, but I was definietly sensitive to the difference, and I was still judging it. I kept telling my wife, who doensn't really get any of this, including my obsession with playing the piano in the first place, that I wasn't sure what I was hearing. Then a few hours later, I would say, I really think I like this. Then, finally the next day, I told her, "I really like what Bill did to my piano. I really, really like this new temperament. I think I understand it. It makes the piano sing!"

So, whether you want to call it fad or not, my sense of it all is that I got treated totally right by a tuning artist who was interested in making my piano sound the best that it possibly can. When Bill came to tune in April, he discovered a problem with the damper system alignment that will take some extra time to fix. I could see it with my own eyes, between a sixteenth or a thirty-secondth of an inch problem, which solves another mystery and that I will be thrilled to have done, since I'm sure Bill will do it right and charge me a fair price for the work. And when I'm gone, somebody is going to get a really, really fine little working vintage spinet piano to enjoy.

I, for one, appreciate this sweet heart of a man who traveled 90 miles twice now to improve my life. I don't consider EBVT III a fad--I consider it an innovation worth recognizing. I can still appreciate a finely tuned ET, but I will continue to enthuse about EBVT III. I think professional and amatuer performers need to know about it, and ought to be able to ask for the temperament on their performance pianos. In my humble opinion, your reference to Gresham's Law is totally unfair and a beautiful example of "invective." So, by way of measured response, perhaps what Bill is finding and fighting as he encounters new pianos to tune, which have been left in Reverse Well and sloppy ET, is the manifestation of "Sturgeon's Law?"*

Andy, thanks for your response and its especially appreciated that you stayed on course without resorting to name calling or assumptions about myself or others that continue to tune on the "dark side", as Bill envisions it.

Your experience is not that uncommon in this day and age in an unregulated trade. The time devoted to tuning and the techs experience has far more to do with the quality of a tuning IMHO, than a choice of reasonably similar temperament. There are good and not so good tunings of all types out there. Its quite possible that there are other tuners/techs out there that could have made your spinet shine better than the one you had before Bill, even though you might not think so.

Your posting does remind me of a cliche scenario of two people doing each other a favour so I hope you understand my skepticism about a fair, unbiased representation of your experience and your results. This forum has never really been used much in the past for comparisons and tests of this nature until EBVT reared its head here.Most techs have done what Bill did with you at one time or another.

Throwing in little extras on top of a tuning has also been discussed here before. Its a nice way to build a relationship with a customer and have some issues addressed that a customer would not feel inclined to pay much for. It also educates a customer when they find out that these things do make a difference and its not just a shallow attempt to generate more revenue.

My reference to Gresham's Law was not "invective", it was actually a compliment if you were to interpret it as "bad tunings drive out good ones" in a market where both exist at the same face value. If Bill were to become so busy with his special tuning that he could no longer service you easily, you would keep quiet about it and hoard it for yourself, rather than tell everyone about it and run the risk of losing him altogether or paying much more for the service (because of demand).

From a business perspective another saying also comes to mind, "Only a fool sells gold when everyone is lining up to buy silver". Its a long hard sell to convince average people that their spinet will sound like a much larger more expensive piano, let alone the claim that you are the only tech who can make it so. If this was the reality, spinets would be much more closer in price to larger pianos and piano manufacturers would be using this "special" expertise Bill claims to have to validate it. They don't, and spinets are still spinets.